Space Shuttle 40th Anniversary
Discussion
Today is the 40th anniversary of the first ever launch of the Space Shuttle (Columbia). I remember watching this live - it was a Sunday afternoon in this part of the world.
Lunar Module 5 is running a real time "as live" stream on his You Tube channel at the moment so you can follow events as they happened.
It was an incredible sight to watch on its first flight and we now know how very close they came to total disaster on that first mission.
Crippen and Young were very brave men.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS7MNPWES-E
Lunar Module 5 is running a real time "as live" stream on his You Tube channel at the moment so you can follow events as they happened.
It was an incredible sight to watch on its first flight and we now know how very close they came to total disaster on that first mission.
Crippen and Young were very brave men.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS7MNPWES-E
Had days 1 and 2 on in the background whilst pretending to do other work. Things which struck me;
1. How we have become accustomed to continuous communications between spacecraft and the ground. That only came about once NSA had TDRSS operational. Same for real-time high resolution video.
2. Amused at Gene Kranz's increasing irritation at being asked the same questions over and over again at each press briefing.
3. Deke Slayton's sideburns.
1. How we have become accustomed to continuous communications between spacecraft and the ground. That only came about once NSA had TDRSS operational. Same for real-time high resolution video.
2. Amused at Gene Kranz's increasing irritation at being asked the same questions over and over again at each press briefing.
3. Deke Slayton's sideburns.
For the first four years of Shuttle flights, communications with Mission Control were very patchy due to lack of continuous cover.
Apollo pretty much DID have continuous cover but that was because a vast fleet of ships and aircraft were made available to cover "dead spots" in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans. The Shuttle programme was not afforded the type of budget to allow an effort on that scale so they had to wait until TDRS (Tracking Data and Relay System) was fully in place to enable pretty much a 100% link to the Shuttle.
TDRS is still in use and is an important element of space station operations and will, of course, be integral with Artemis and any future programmes.
One of the payloads lost when Challenger was destroyed in January 1986 was a TDRS satellite.
Apollo pretty much DID have continuous cover but that was because a vast fleet of ships and aircraft were made available to cover "dead spots" in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans. The Shuttle programme was not afforded the type of budget to allow an effort on that scale so they had to wait until TDRS (Tracking Data and Relay System) was fully in place to enable pretty much a 100% link to the Shuttle.
TDRS is still in use and is an important element of space station operations and will, of course, be integral with Artemis and any future programmes.
One of the payloads lost when Challenger was destroyed in January 1986 was a TDRS satellite.
Correct - but Apollo 13's big anniversary was last year and we had a very good thread on it back then.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=18...
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=18...
They were remarkable vehicles and much bigger in person than I'd previously thought.
I was just watching a replay of the BBC coverage of the landing - here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5fhcsQY_MU
Pity they didn't show Captain John Young after they landed. Walking round the Columbia, talking to & shaking hands with the ground crew and obviously still pumped with the whole experience. And boy, had he seen & done a lot in his career even before that.
I was just watching a replay of the BBC coverage of the landing - here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5fhcsQY_MU
Pity they didn't show Captain John Young after they landed. Walking round the Columbia, talking to & shaking hands with the ground crew and obviously still pumped with the whole experience. And boy, had he seen & done a lot in his career even before that.
xeny said:
If anyone hasn't already purchased it, the Kindle version of Rowland White's book on STS-1 is £1.99 at present. The subtitle has "nearly ended in disaster" but it is a much more level headed read than that would suggest.
Highly recommended book - one of the best on the Shuttle and the politics behind it.But the by-line is correct. STS-1 very nearly DID end in disaster. They didn't realise during the mission how badly Columbia had been damaged during the launch.
Was lucky enough to see a shuttle launch at Kennedy Space Centre in 2006.
Even from several miles away the ground shook, and also wasn’t prepared for the flames to be literally as bright as the sun. Truly awesome spectacle. Found it mind blowing that there could be people calmly sitting right on top of what was basically a huge bomb going off. Incredible.
Even from several miles away the ground shook, and also wasn’t prepared for the flames to be literally as bright as the sun. Truly awesome spectacle. Found it mind blowing that there could be people calmly sitting right on top of what was basically a huge bomb going off. Incredible.
Eric Mc said:
But the by-line is correct. STS-1 very nearly DID end in disaster. They didn't realise during the mission how badly Columbia had been damaged during the launch.
The by-line is correct, but my possibly jaundiced experience of books that have subtitles like that is that they tend to over inflate minute risks.Yes the risks were real, but the book treats them more calmly than the choice of language on the cover might lead you to expect.
We are talking about "Into the Black" specifically. In this case, the by-line is VERY accurate.
Columbia came within an inch of being lost on that launch - for two completely different reasons - although the root cause was the same. They were very, very lucky in that flight.
(And that was NOT related to missing tiles).
If you hear the call from the Capcom during launch "Columbia, you are lofting a little - you're going to be a little high at staging", that was an indication of one of the problems that had arisen - although they didn't know at the time why Columbia's ascent trajectory was too steep.
During the post launch press conferences they referred to this "lofting" phenomenon and gave two separate reasons why it might have happened - neither of which were correct (too much thrust from the Solid Rocket Boosters or unexpected winds at high altitude were the guessed reasons).
It was only when Columbia was examined closely after landing did they realise that Shuttle had suffered some damage during the launch that came very close to destroying the vehicle.
Columbia came within an inch of being lost on that launch - for two completely different reasons - although the root cause was the same. They were very, very lucky in that flight.
(And that was NOT related to missing tiles).
If you hear the call from the Capcom during launch "Columbia, you are lofting a little - you're going to be a little high at staging", that was an indication of one of the problems that had arisen - although they didn't know at the time why Columbia's ascent trajectory was too steep.
During the post launch press conferences they referred to this "lofting" phenomenon and gave two separate reasons why it might have happened - neither of which were correct (too much thrust from the Solid Rocket Boosters or unexpected winds at high altitude were the guessed reasons).
It was only when Columbia was examined closely after landing did they realise that Shuttle had suffered some damage during the launch that came very close to destroying the vehicle.
Amazing what they were able to build 40 years ago.
I remember Mike Mullane's book where he described standing on the flight deck looking out the window during re-entry, and then of course it just landed like any other aircraft. Compared with modern astronauts who are strapped in suffering high-g before plopping down into the ocean (or with Soyuz feeling like they just had a car crash).
Even today you put the Shuttle next to any other Spacecraft, even "brand new" ones and it looks like something from the future.
This picture always makes me smile, showing just how huge the Shuttle was in comparison:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJBt2bAWUAAW-Ch?format...
I remember Mike Mullane's book where he described standing on the flight deck looking out the window during re-entry, and then of course it just landed like any other aircraft. Compared with modern astronauts who are strapped in suffering high-g before plopping down into the ocean (or with Soyuz feeling like they just had a car crash).
Even today you put the Shuttle next to any other Spacecraft, even "brand new" ones and it looks like something from the future.
This picture always makes me smile, showing just how huge the Shuttle was in comparison:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJBt2bAWUAAW-Ch?format...
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff